They Aren’t Even Going to See It Coming

Wading through about a dozen attacks at Commentary magazine on the Obama administration for, at the very least, demanding that Israel act like an honest broker with their “closest allies,” I found this fromNoah Pollack:

To add to John’s piece, there are probably a couple more layers of political foolishness here.

One is the timing. All the pro-Israel heavies are coming to D.C. in a few days for the AIPAC policy conference, the single most important event of the year for the pro-Israel community. And now Obama has set it up so that pretty much the only thing people are going to be talking about is this crisis — and not just talking, but planning how to push back.

Quite honestly, I am thrilled with the prospect of a bunch of AIPAC heavies coming to DC, getting in front of cameras, and publicly attempting to “push back” against the elected government of this nation in advocacy for a foreign country. I hope they are every bit as aggressive and obnoxious as your average Weekly Standard or Commentary magazine writer.

I think that would be wonderful. The reason AIPAC has so much sway with Congress is because the American people honestly have no idea who or what AIPAC is, and having them trying to act as a co-equal branch of government could be quite, shall we say, illuminating, especially because there is a stark difference in the opinions of the American public and our elites regarding the entire issue.

Please. Anything but the briar patch!






85 replies
  1. 1
    El Cid says:

    Again, these aren’t advocates for “Israel”, but for the particular hawkish and militaristic Israeli policies and politicians they prefer. Real life Israelis and Palestinians can go to hell as far as these types are concerned.

  2. 2
    Max says:

    Cantor got the party started…

    http://www.sanfranciscosentinel.com/?p=64567

    My favorite quote…

    “In an effort to ingratiate our country with the Arab world, this administration has shown a troubling eagerness to undercut our allies and friends,” Cantor said.

  3. 3
    Lev says:

    Cantor has an unusual definition of friend. I don’t have a friend that would hide out in his house, wait for me to visit, then kidney punch me.

  4. 4
    Alex S. says:

    Netanyahu’s election victory was extremely regretable. There could have been a real chance for peace if his challenger had won (I already forgot her name, though). A peace will only be possible without conservatives in any government. There was no chance for peace for as long as Bush was in office. And Clinton had no chance for peace after Yitzhak Rabin had died and Netanyahu replaced him. Also, the radicals are supporting each other. Bush provokes Ahmadinejad who then goes on to threaten Israel who in turn demand more american action.

  5. 5
    Cat Lady says:

    This US/Israel relationship has been a loose thread that has needed to be pulled on for too long. So, here we go. I just am very worried now that Bibi’s in cahoots with the neo-cons here (cough*Cheney*cough) who will convince him to bomb Iran, just to fuck with Obama. That’s my very real worry.

  6. 6
    Mark S. says:

    What is incredibly frustrating about this issue is that anyone who has studied it for more than five minutes (and approaches it with an open mind) will come to the conclusion that the only thing that will work is a two state solution. The only other possibilities are a) ethnic cleansing, b) an apartheid state, or c) a multi-ethnic state in which Jews will soon be the minority.

  7. 7
    Keith G says:

    Only please, Brer Fox, please don’t throw me into the briar patch.

    Heh.

  8. 8

    I love it that the United States is but a client state of Israel.

  9. 9
    freelancer says:

    Someone clue me in to the briar patch reference?

    Is it just that the entire region is like a wasp’s nest that is dangling by a pubic hair from a stalactite in the darkest corner of Hell?

  10. 10
    Lev says:

    @Alex S.: To be fair, Clinton did have a chance for peace with Ehud Barak as the Israeli PM in 2000. In fact, he was as close as you can be. Barak offered a deal that gave Arafat everything he wanted except the Right of Return, which Israel can’t really offer and remain a Jewish state. And Arafat turned it down and walked away from the table. Clinton reportedly yelled at him after the 2000 election, after Arafat called him with farewell wishes and said that Clinton was a great man, to which Clinton said that he could have been a great man were it not for him.

    Of course, now, Barak is Netanyahu’s Defense Minister.

  11. 11
    Redshirt says:

    What a fascinating dynamic. Now that the GOP has come out against the US Military, I’m hoping we can go all the way and they can outright condemn the USA on behalf of Israel.

  12. 12
    r€nato says:

    So Hawaii is not a US state, but Israel is.

    Got it.

  13. 13
    Fern says:

    @Mark S.: I’m coming to the conclusion that it’s too late for a two-state solution. I think your option c. is the best of a bad lot.

  14. 14
    mcc says:

    And now Obama has set it up so that pretty much the only thing people are going to be talking about is this crisis

    Note the implication here that it was Obama (rather than, say, Netanyahu), who timed and carried out an event which other parties are then obligated to respond to.

  15. 15
    r€nato says:

    @Lev:

    I have tons of sympathy for the plight of the Palestinian people, but their leaders are such idiots. That was the best deal they were going to get for a generation if not longer.

  16. 16
    r€nato says:

    @Mark S.:

    I think it’s pretty clear Israel has chosen b)

    They believe they can keep the Palestinians down, indefinitely, and never give them a state nor a square inch of the land they have stolen and keep stealing from them.

  17. 17
    pinson says:

    This Foreign Policy piece from over the weekend was very interesting.
    http://mideast.foreignpolicy.c.....hole_story

    It’s a potentially explosive story. If Petraus is saying that Israel’s behavior is killing American troops – and that’s essentially the gist of the piece – it puts the whole Lieberman/AIPAC crew in a pretty unpleasant place. As it points out:

    There are important and powerful lobbies in America: the NRA, the American Medical Association, the lawyers — and the Israeli lobby. But no lobby is as important, or as powerful, as the U.S. military.

    Could get interesting if/when wingnuts have to choose between Likud or The Troops. It’s an easy call, of course, for the Commentary crowd. Not so much for the GOP leadership.

  18. 18
    t jasper parnell says:

    @freelancer: Bre Rabbit, I think it was. There is, iirc, a potentially dangerously coded reference to tar involved.

  19. 19
    robertdsc says:

    The Israelis make me sick.

  20. 20
    West of the Cascades says:

    @Alex S.: How can you forget Tzipi Livni, one of the most best-named politicians anywhere?

    Goodluck Jonathan, the acting president of Nigeria, is also pretty awesome.

  21. 21
    t jasper parnell says:

    @Mark S.: I read a great deal on this and other issues related to the ME in preparation for teaching a course on the Modern ME and came away with the clear sense that there is no obvious solution and that reasonable people can disagree on how to proceed. Except, of course, for an abiding conviction that the Palestinians are being screwed by their nominal allies and leaders and that the world would be a better place if people realized their religious beliefs through private piety and did not seek to realized them as a church militarized.

  22. 22
    freelancer says:

    @t jasper parnell:

    Brer Rabbit? from Splash Mountain? That’s obscure, even for this place.

    /deliberately obtuse

  23. 23
    Tom Bishop says:

    For an understanding about what was behind the expansion of settlements during Biden’s visit read the following:

    Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and John Hagee Share Stage as Biden Arrives in Israel
    Yesterday (Monday) Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke to hundreds of Christian Zionists in Jerusalem at an event organized by John Hagee and Christians United for Israel. at:

    http://www.talk2action.org/sto....._in_Israel

    and

    Netanyahu and Pastor Hagee’s Lovefest on Eve of Biden’s Arrival in Israel (be sure to view the videos)
    http://maxblumenthal.com/2010/.....in-israel/

  24. 24
    Corner Stone says:

    Edited to say I don’t feel like it anymore.

  25. 25
    Alex S. says:

    @Lev:

    Ah yes, I forgot about this episode. I remember liking Ehud Barak though. Maybe he can be instrumental in striking a deal. It seems that peace is not that far away if there is the will to do so on both sides.

    @Mark S.:

    I don’t know…. I have had the opinion that Israel should make a deal rather sooner than later because they are losing the demographic “war”. The palestinian minority already inside of Israel will continue to grow and the palestinian people in the Gaza strip and Palestine are one of the fastest growing peoples of the world. Not to mention the possibility of a small nuclear war or a nuclear terrorist attack.

  26. 26
    Mnemosyne says:

    Fun fact: the Br’er Rabbit stories seem to be equal parts Cherokee and African in origin. The African originals feature the trickster god Anansi, who’s a spider, not a rabbit.

  27. 27
    Alex S. says:

    @West of the Cascades:

    Aaaaah yes, thanks for reminding me!

  28. 28
    dr. bloor says:

    AIPAC would never settle for being a co-equal branch of our government.

  29. 29
    Ash Can says:

    @robertdsc: The real Israelis are swell. It’s the right-wing warmongering assholes who are going to be the death of the Jewish nation (and ours, if we don’t know where to draw the line).

  30. 30
    :Libertini says:

    @freelancer: In the Southern folk tale (and later Disney movie Song of the South) Brer Rabbit asks Brer Fox NOT to throw him in the briar patch, because that’s where he wants to go.

    Is it just that the entire region is like a wasp’s nest that is dangling by a pubic hair from a stalactite in the darkest corner of Hell?

    Those are the folk tales that will be told by and to children in generations hence.

  31. 31
    Alan says:

    @Max: Well, he’s got to energize the Palin wing of the conservative party. Go Armageddon!

  32. 32
    Michael says:

    I’m still trying to figure out what (if anything) our “dear friend and ally” Israel has ever actually done for us that wasn’t directly related solely to clipping thorns out of its own little briar patch.

    Israel reminds me of the long term houseguest who puts his feet all over the furniture, eats your food and drinks all your beer while hitting on your wife, all as he bitches about your cheap-assed taste in beer and being bored.

  33. 33
    :Libertini says:

    Please. Anything but the briar patch!

    Would that the Dems would master this useful stragegy on all its frustration by foxes. Yet they are felled by ego, just as Brer Rabbit was.

  34. 34
    Just Some Fuckhead says:

    @Mark S.:

    What is incredibly frustrating about this issue is that anyone who has studied it for more than five minutes (and approaches it with an open mind) will come to the conclusion that the only thing that will work is a two state solution.

    Or the rapture of Christians then destruction of Israel at the hands of the Anti-Christ.

    I call that a win-win.

  35. 35
    MattMinus says:

    Cole’s an anti-semite in 3…2…

  36. 36
    John says:

    @Lev:

    Barak offered a deal that gave Arafat everything he wanted except the Right of Return, which Israel can’t really offer and remain a Jewish state. And Arafat turned it down and walked away from the table.

    That’s not really what happened. Barak offered a state that was divided up into a bunch of non-contiguous cantons, among other things.

  37. 37
    salacious crumb says:

    Just from reading the newspapers in Israel, I get a sense that a lot is not mentioned in the mainstream press here or just even American press in general. To many in Israel, Netanyahu had been planning this sort of showdown for months. He is convinced that with Obama already preoccupied with the health care push and Afghanistan, he can ram through more settlement building while Obama is distracted. And if Obama dare raise his ire, then he would face the anger of not just the US Congressional Democrats and their paymasters in AIPAC but also Republicans. So Bibi figured he could go ahead and authorize more land annexation. I sense that whatever Hillary said in private to Netanyahu she must have probably warned him not to underestimate Obama while he is distracted. And now comes this interesting piece in FP magazine with Mullen and Petraeus warning Israel that their actions are indirectly harming US troops in the battlefield and further making US look weak to China and Saudi Arabia.
    The way I see it either Obama is screwed or the Palestinians are (again). Obama needs to push health care through and cannot afford to piss off Democrats who suckle at the AIPAC lobby nipple, lest they decide that they dont wanna vote on his health care. so he will huff and puff and tell the Palestinians “see I got mad at Israel! Now do what Netanyahu says or else!”

  38. 38
    Mike Kay says:

    whaddya expect from a dumb pollack

  39. 39
    fasteddie9318 says:

    @pinson

    Could get interesting if/when wingnuts have to choose between Likud or The Troops.

    I doubt it. They’ll toss the Troops under the bus, as usual, and then scream about how the Left hates our military because they don’t want to let it kill more Ayrabs, or something like that.

  40. 40
    chopper says:

    man, do i hate netanyahu.

    and israelis are like americans. the right wing warmongering assholes make them all look bad.

  41. 41
    chopper says:

    @John:

    indeed. it was the best deal the palestinians were ever offered, but that aint necessarily saying much. needless to say, the fact that the palestinians don’t believe in ‘baby steps’ didn’t help either. those are two big issues with the peace process.

  42. 42
    Mark S. says:

    My understanding is that Camp David fell apart over the status of Jerusalem, but not everyone agrees on that.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2.....or_impasse

  43. 43
    4jkb4ia says:

    Given how polite the AIPAC folks were to Obama the candidate, the wished-for heckling will likely not happen when it is on C-SPAN and people can see it.
    This whole issue is about whether all of Jerusalem should belong to Israel and I cannot believe that any official member of AIPAC is dumb enough to say that on TV.

  44. 44
    Slaney Black says:

    What is incredibly frustrating about this issue is that anyone who has studied it for more than five minutes (and approaches it with an open mind) will come to the conclusion that the only thing that will work is a two state solution. The only other possibilities are a) ethnic cleansing, b) an apartheid state, or c) a multi-ethnic state in which Jews will soon be the minority.

    Please. Anything but the briar patch!

  45. 45
    hidflect says:

    @r€nato:

    95% of 22% was the best deal? I’d keep fighting personally.

  46. 46
    salacious crumb says:

    @fasteddie

    Lets not forget something; We went into Iraq and removed Saddam essentially for Israel. Well that and oil. and Netanyahu and Livni and all those right wingers owe us big time for risking our ass over there to keep them safe. They werent exactly cautioning us in our planning for war with Iraq..if anything it was 101% encouragement all the way….the least they can do is pretend that they care for our feelings as well.

  47. 47
    Tax Analyst says:

    @El Cid:

    Again, these aren’t advocates for “Israel”, but for the particular hawkish and militaristic Israeli policies and politicians they prefer. Real life Israelis and Palestinians can go to hell as far as these types are concerned.

    Exactly!

  48. 48
    Bob S. says:

    @John: There’s an article by Uri Avnery on CounterPunch today that alludes to 2000, explaining that Israelis were essentially negotiating in bad faith as they knew that stepping up the pace of new Jewish settlements in East Jerusalem made any deal a non-starter.

  49. 49
    Bruce (formerly Steve S.) says:

    For all you Kucinich obsessives, here is Rep. Shelley Berkley, who voted for the House HCR bill: “The administration’s strong implication that the enduring alliance between the U.S. and Israel has been weakened, and that America’s ability to broker talks between Israel and Palestinian authorities has been undermined, is an irresponsible overreaction.” She’s reportedly wavering on the next health care vote. I wonder what her price will be for a “yes”.

  50. 50
    New Yorker says:

    @MattMinus:

    beat me to it. Unless you agree with everything spewed by Commentary and The Weekly Standard, you hate the Jews. Just look at what Sully has had to deal with of late.

    To be fair, of course, Israel isn’t the only country with which we have an insane, self-abusive relationship. There’s Cuba (how’s that embargo doing?) and Turkey (still can’t call the Armenian Genocide a “genocide”).

  51. 51
    dan robinson says:

    I was a long supporter of Israel, but I have gotten to the point that I think it is time for them to sink or swim. This shit they pull and then assume that they can manipulate the US is getting tiring.

  52. 52
    liberal says:

    @John:

    Barak offered a state that was divided up into a bunch of non-contiguous cantons, among other things.

    Right.

  53. 53
    Michael says:

    For all you Kucinich obsessives, here is Rep. Shelley Berkley, who voted for the House HCR bill: “The administration’s strong implication that the enduring alliance between the U.S. and Israel has been weakened, and that America’s ability to broker talks between Israel and Palestinian authorities has been undermined, is an irresponsible overreaction.” She’s reportedly wavering on the next health care vote. I wonder what her price will be for a “yes”.

    Shit like that makes me want to donate to Hamas and throw a little bit to Hezbollah.

  54. 54
    liberal says:

    @New Yorker:

    There’s Cuba (how’s that embargo doing?) and Turkey (still can’t call the Armenian Genocide a “genocide”).

    That’s true.

    Though while I think the embargo against Cuba is idiotic and just keeps the Castro-ites in power, the damage to the US is relatively minimal.

    As far as declaring the Armenian Genocide a “genocide,” I certainly think it was, but OTOH I don’t think the US government and a large fraction of the population here (some, like myself, excepted) would be happy about the Turkish or other governments making official proclamations that the natives here were exterminated in a genocide.

  55. 55
    liberal says:

    @Bruce (formerly Steve S.):

    “The administration’s strong implication that the enduring alliance between the U.S. and Israel has been weakened, and that America’s ability to broker talks between Israel and Palestinian authorities has been undermined, is an irresponsible overreaction.”

    Does that dumb Congresscritter even understand that there’s no formal treaty-based alliance between the US and Israel?

  56. 56
    El Cid says:

    This fantasy that Israel offered all to Arafat — a clear and corrupt asshole, maybe even approaching Israeli officials in his cold-blooded non-concern for human life — and he “walked away” is a useful myth promulgated by the Israeli hawk side. If you read the daily Israeli press, no one even tries to make such absurd allegations.

  57. 57
    Sly says:

    All the pro-Israel heavies are coming to D.C. in a few days for the AIPAC policy conference, the single most important event of the year for the pro-Israel community.

    Also the single most important opportunity for the CIA to test its counter-espionage capabilities.

  58. 58
    liberal says:

    @salacious crumb:

    Just from reading the newspapers in Israel, I get a sense that a lot is not mentioned in the mainstream press here or just even American press in general.

    Among those in the know, it’s practically a cliche that the range of opinion is far greater in Israel than in the US.

  59. 59
    Bob S. says:

    @liberal: There’s also probably less uniformity of opinion in the Knesset in Jerusalem than in Knesset West in Washington.

  60. 60

    I must admit that I am biased. I am basically judeophilic and pro-Israel.

    HOWEVER – In this last instance, Israel acted like a bunch of assholes. I think that their announcement, the timing and everything, not only undermined the peace effort it was an insult to the US.

    What did they think would be the US reaction?

    Hooray to Obama and to Clinton for showing some backbone.

  61. 61
    El Cid says:

    @liberal:

    Among those in the know, it’s practically a cliche that the range of opinion is far greater in Israel than in the US.

    This is what’s so amazingly sad!

    We don’t have to depend on U.S. media interpretations of what foreign news media are thinking — we can just get it from the internet! You can read Ha’aretz, or Yediot Ahronot, or the Jerusalem Post, or many other Palestinian and Arab and Muslim sources yourself, for free!!!

    The same goes for coverage of Yurrip or LatnAmurka.

    Why depend on shitbags like the Washington Post hawkitorial page, or the New York Times balance it carefully for pro-militarist Israeli opinion?

    My god, I’m just an ordinary, comparatively low-paid citizen, and I watch billion dollar media corporations in the U.S. act like they’ve never seen the internet and can’t dare discuss what the local media is discussing!

    I mean, this is without taking into account the truly weird fact of how many various political and media figures have served directly or indirectly in the IDF.

    I don’t need some shit-head U.S. media analyst to tell me what’s ‘going on in Israel’ or ‘what the Arab street is saying’. I can read it myself.

    You got to admire the propaganda system for being able to pretend that we just can’t do this nowadays.

  62. 62
    Mike P says:

    @r€nato: I see what did you there.

  63. 63
    Svensker says:

    @Lev:

    To be fair, Clinton did have a chance for peace with Ehud Barak as the Israeli PM in 2000. In fact, he was as close as you can be. Barak offered a deal that gave Arafat everything he wanted except the Right of Return, which Israel can’t really offer and remain a Jewish state. And Arafat turned it down and walked away from the table. Clinton reportedly yelled at him after the 2000 election, after Arafat called him with farewell wishes and said that Clinton was a great man, to which Clinton said that he could have been a great man were it not for him.

    That’s one side of the story. Others, including Swisher and Ben-Ami, have a different view.

  64. 64
    Kyle says:

    Bibi and the neocons decided to calculatedly deliver a big fat political gift to their Repig cronies by insulting the elected government of this country. Fuck them with a rusty chainsaw. Why are we heavily subsidizing that country and letting it lead us around by the nose?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident

  65. 65
    Mark S. says:

    @Svensker:

    I don’t really believe that’s what brought down Camp David, either. I think most Arabs realize that the Israelis will never agree to the right of return; they just use it as a bargaining chip.

  66. 66
    Marc says:

    It is extremely simple to bring Israel to heel. All Obama has to do is declare that Israel has nuclear weapons and that they are not under IAEA inspections. The Symington amendment to FAA (Foreign Assistance Act) automatically applies, which cuts off ALL economic and military aid and also applies serious sanctions. All it takes is a pargraph on a single sheet of paper with Obama’s signature on it. But, I doubt that he will.

  67. 67
    fasteddie9318 says:

    @salacious crumb

    the least they can do is pretend that they care for our feelings as well

    Why should they bother? 60 years of American foreign policy has made it clear that Israel is the dominant partner in this relationship. Don’t think for a second that Netanyahu’s move to announce these settlements upon Biden’s arrival wasn’t intended as a clear reminder about who’s in charge. They’ve got no more reason to care about American interests than any CEO of a large company has to care about how the night janitor’s kids are doing. In fact, we’re not really even supposed to have any interests outside of what’s good for Israel.

    At some point I still hope this country gets sick of being Tina to Israel’s Ike, but I don’t have much actual confidence in that happening.

  68. 68
    New Yorker says:

    @liberal:

    OK, a better example of our insane bend-over-and-take-it relationship with Turkey would be how we deal with the Kurds. Iraqi Kurdistan is a prosperous, peaceful place that has developed into the place that Iraq was supposed to be in Bill Kristol’s fever dreams. The problem is that the Kurds want their own country, and they want Kirkuk as part of it. We’d never, ever allow that to happen because the Turks would flip out if Kurdistan was ever an independent country.

  69. 69
    Joe Buck says:

    Barak’s offer didn’t come anywhere close to giving Arafat everything he wanted but the right of return. The West Bank would be divided into four pieces, separated by settler-only roads. Israel would retain control of all of the borders, including the one between the West Bank and Israel, with the effective power to seal those borders. It would have been a bantustan, and Arafat would have been killed as a traitor had he signed.

  70. 70
    Duglarri says:

    It’s always been curious to hear Israel described as an ally of the US. It’s not.

    Israel is not a strategic asset. It’s a strategic OBJECTIVE.

    Israel isn’t an aide to US policy. It’s what US policy, money and influence, are all organized to support.

    It’s about the most important objective of US foreign policy, anywhere, anytime.

    It’s in this context that Israel can kick Obama around. They know they’re not an ally at all. They’re the point of the whole exercise.

    For once I’d like to see someone point out that Israel is not an ally of the United States, and why. The why is simple. You can’t have a mutual defence treaty with a country that won’t tell you where it’s borders are.

  71. 71
    Carpenter says:

    El Cid is right: these militaristic pro-Israeli Jews in the media, lobby groups and the political parties are what used to be called Zionists, even openly by themselves, until they decided that anyone who did so was an anti-Semite who would then have his career as a journalist/politician/academician destroyed. It is still perfectly valid to call them Zionists however, because that is the movement they belong to. And these people have caused immense grief by tying the U.S. to its wars on the Palestinians, and then consequently causing wars and threats against the few Middle Eastern countries that have supported the Palestinian resistance (Syria, Iran and Iraq – crushed for this crime even though it was a loyal U.S. ally). And let’s not forget the U.S. money and diplomatic and military support for governments that bow to the Israeli agenda – like Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

    It is amazing. A few million Israelis occupying a few million Palestinians determines the lion share of American policy throughout the Middle East. The Afghanistan war, the Iraq war, even the Russo-Georgian war – the Georgian army being built up by the CIA and Mossad as a base against Iran – would not have happened without this Zionist influence in Washington.

    It is a good thing we have the internet today, so word of what is going on can reach more people than ever before.

  72. 72
    Fnord says:

    W.a. due respect, this isnt about the palestinians so much as it is with Israel having openly insulted both Turkey and the UAE, wich are central to the US war effort. If AIPAC thinks thet some crazyassed settlers are more important than the War on Terror then it will be interesting for them to say so. All arguments Ihave heard to this point is just slandering, that Obama is a secret muslim and hates AMerica said in nicer words. Hell, Abe Foxman called Petraeus “prone to blame the jews for everything”.

  73. 73
    Mjaum says:

    Incensed A > Incinerated P.

    Still sad.

  74. 74
    Tridant says:

    Israel: We’re confiscating more Palestinian land to build Jews-only settlements. (Jim Crow wasn’t really that bad. Apartheid is fine.)

    Obama: That isn’t helpful.

    Israel: So? What you gonna do about it, black boy?

    Obama: I’ll … say so.

    Israel/AIPAC: How dare you, you anti-Semite! You do not want to declare your loyalty to anything we do, subordinate US interests to Zionist theivery and greed, and lick our A*S, that’s fine. We run this country. Our Israel-firsters and bought-and-paid-for whores in Congress always come through; they will keep the money and political support flowing.

    —–
    Read Chas Freeman: This time apartheid has western complicity.

    http://mondoweiss.net/2010/03/.....icity.html

  75. 75
    Bruce (formerly Steve S.) says:

    Ben Smith has dug up more Democrats who are criticizing the President’s foreign policy.

  76. 76
    Colin Laney says:

    Bre Rabbit, I think it was. There is, iirc, a potentially dangerously coded reference to tar involved.

    That was a different story. When Rabbit begs Fox not to throw him in the briar patch, he is tricking Fox into putting him exactly where he wants to be. The Joel Chandler Harris stories were written in a racist dialect, but the stories themselves were based on African-American — most of them Yoruba — folk tales and are generally about the weak outwitting the strong. The tar baby story isn’t what you think it is, either. Rabbit makes tar model of himself and tricks Fox into attacking it, which traps Fox in a wad of tar.

  77. 77
    John Bland says:

    Marc . . .

    It would SEEM so, wouldn’t it? But somebody in congers said they own us? And then there’s the “sunk cost.” Pogo said “We have met the enemy . . .”

    My Mom’s parents skipped Alsace Lorraine, just in time as it turned out. When I was a kid we watched Hitler in the movie newsreels between Captain Marvel (BatMan/1940) episodes. I wondered why the general population didn’t try to resist. I suppose it was because of what might happen to them as did, which proved sagacious as it did. Now I watch the ZionNasties and, again, wonder. I get the impression that this time a ‘solution will be found in penning up the ‘others’ then incrementally removing them alive by driving them out of the area with calibrated savagery, aware that history tends to bite the hand of him who doesn’t heed it (TAO.) I hope I don’t seem anti-semitic, altho I agree with robertdsc , cause I prolly be one . . . like, unless I am misinformed, is all them Palestinians.

    But hey! ZippityDoDah, ZippityAye . . . us pioneers never say die . . .

  78. 78
    John says:

    PRETRIB RAPTURE POLITICS

    Many are still unaware of the eccentric, 180-year-old British theory underlying the politics of American evangelicals and Christian Zionists.
    Journalist and historian Dave MacPherson has spent more than 40 years focusing on the origin and spread of what is known as the apocalyptic “pretribulation rapture” – the inspiration behind Hal Lindsey’s bestsellers of the 1970s and Tim LaHaye’s today.
    Although promoters of this endtime evacuation from earth constantly repeat their slogan that “it’s imminent and always has been” (which critics view more as a sales pitch than a scriptural statement), it was unknown in all official theology and organized religion before 1830.
    And MacPherson’s research also reveals how hostile the pretrib rapture view has been to other faiths:
    It is anti-Islam. TV preacher John Hagee has been advocating “a pre-emptive military strike against Iran.” (Google “Roots of Warlike Christian Zionism.”)
    It is anti-Jewish. MacPherson’s book “The Rapture Plot” (see Armageddon Books etc.) exposes hypocritical anti-Jewishness in even the theory’s foundation.
    It is anti-Catholic. Lindsey and C. I. Scofield are two of many leaders who claim that the final Antichrist will be a Roman Catholic. (Google “Pretrib Hypocrisy.”)
    It is anti-Protestant. For this reason no major Protestant denomination has ever adopted this escapist view.
    It even has some anti-evangelical aspects. The first publication promoting this novel endtime view spoke degradingly of “the name by which the mixed multitude of modern Moabites love to be distinguished, – the Evangelical World.” (MacPherson’s “Plot,” p. 85)
    Despite the above, MacPherson proves that the “glue” that holds constantly in-fighting evangelicals together long enough to be victorious voting blocs in elections is the same “fly away” view. He notes that Jerry Falwell, when giving political speeches just before an election, would unfailingly state: “We believe in the pretribulational rapture!”
    In addition to “The Rapture Plot,” MacPherson’s many internet articles include “Famous Rapture Watchers,” “Pretrib Rapture Diehards,” “Edward Irving is Unnerving,” “America’s Pretrib Rapture Traffickers,” “Thomas Ice (Bloopers),” “Pretrib Rapture Secrecy” and “Pretrib Rapture Dishonesty” (massive plagiarism, phony doctorates, changing of early “rapture” documents in order to falsely credit John Darby with this view, etc.!).
    Because of his devastating discoveries, MacPherson is now No. 1 on the “hate” list of pretrib rapture leaders!
    There’s no question that the leading promoters of this bizarre 19th century end-of-the-world doctrine are solidly pro-Israel and necessarily anti-Palestinian. In light of recently uncovered facts about this fringe-British-invented belief which has always been riddled with dishonesty, many are wondering why it should ever have any influence on Middle East affairs.
    This Johnny-come-lately view raises millions of dollars for political agendas. Only when scholars of all faiths begin to look deeply at it and widely air its “dirty linen” will it cease to be a power. It is the one theological view no one needs!
    With apologies to Winston Churchill – never has so much deception been foisted on so many by so few!

    [Also Google “David Letterman’s Hate, Etc.”]

  79. 79

    […] And John Cole responds to that: […]

  80. 80
    WATSITSNAME says:

    As an outsider, could someone tell me who runs the USA, the elected government or AIPAC ?

  81. 81

    This is why people should be backing J Street. They’re the group of American Jews who (like the majority thereof) aren’t neocons, and whose existence ticks off AIPAC to no end: http://www.jstreet.org

  82. 82
    David says:

    @Michael:

    Brilliant!

  83. 83
    David says:

    @Michael:

    Brilliant!

  84. 84
    liberal says:

    @Duglarri:

    You can’t have a mutual defence treaty with a country that won’t tell you where it’s borders are.

    We don’t actually have a mutual defense treaty with Israel.

  85. 85

    […] week John Cole of Balloon Juice fame noted in regards to the AIPAC convention that is currently going on in Washington, The reason AIPAC has […]

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] week John Cole of Balloon Juice fame noted in regards to the AIPAC convention that is currently going on in Washington, The reason AIPAC has […]

Comments are closed.